[D'rek]

You know me and my naming threads. So, debating between names for the uprising in Seven Cities that takes place from the uprising of G'danisban in DG to the Last Siege of Y'Ghatan in tBH.

Difficulties will arise in that there are many prior rebellions on the continent, including at least two against the Malazans throughout their conquest. More on that in an aside at the bottom for those interested.



Now that that's out of the way, on to the main issue. The uprising in 7C has a lot of names introduced throughout the books, and I can't decide which I like best, but for the sake of the wiki we need to come up with a decisive name. Here's some common ones:

Seven Cities rebellion - not a very good one since it's so vague

Dryjhna Rebellion - this one is good, because the rebellion is run by Dryjhna the goddess and occurs in the sixth or seventh of the 'Seven Years of Dryjhna' (from the beginning of DG). However, the Book of Dryjhna is supposedly a recounting of past events and this could lead to confusion between events if they are named too similarly.

Sha'ik Rebellion - probably the most definitive, as Sha'ik is unique to this rebellion. There was no Sha'ik for previous ones and presumably none for further rebellions, so it is singular.

the Whirlwind

the Apocalypse

So, talk about which ones you like and why.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[aside]
More on the other rebellions:
There's the one at Aren with Barathol where the T'lan Imass went in and minced everyone, which occured around the time of K&D's assassinations (Dujek seems to indicate it was shortly thereafter), and there's also the rebellion Whiskeyjack talks about in MoI which involces the creation of the BBs. Presumably that rebellion occured during the Malazan conquest, and it was a 'rebellion' in that previously-conquered lands rose up against the new Malaz overlords.

I suspect this thread is going to veer into talking about these, so go read these other threads first if you wanna talk about this as well:

http://www.malazanempire.com/IPBforum/inde...ic=1159&hl=
http://www.malazanempire.com/IPBforum/inde...ic=9420&hl=
http://www.malazanempire.com/IPBforum/inde...=9090&st=80
http://www.malazanempire.com/IPBforum/inde...c=12295&hl=
http://www.malazanempire.com/IPBforum/inde...c=10545&hl=
http://www.malazanempire.com/IPBforum/inde...c=10622&hl=
http://www.malazanempire.com/IPBforum/inde...c=10646&hl=
[/aside]

This post has been edited by D'rek: 27 December 2008 - 06:54 PM

[Apocalypse Now]

I was under the assumption that the T'lan Imass had screwed over Aren during the initial conquest of Seven Cities by the Empire, and that the creation of the Bridgeburners was during the initial Malazan conquest of Seven Cities, and occurred when the conquered city's mage cadre retreated into Raraku, with Kalam taking the other mage's powers and so on.

Then later, didn't they take over a big fortress with just a small amount of guys? I think it was during the original conquest these things happened, I don't think you can say that resistance during a foreign power's seizing control over a whole continent is a rebellion, at most it's an insurgency, resistance to occupying forces. The insurgency in Iraq right now, that isn't a rebellion. A rebellion occurs after years of peace perhaps. Like say the US installed government in Iraq gets overthrown in twenty years after we've left, THATS a rebellion.

Seven cities was never a whole government or a whole country so really Aren and the creation of the BB are all within the Malazan conquest, not separate incidents.

I like the sound of Raraku Uprising or the Sha'ik Uprising but any of those are good names to be honest.

This post has been edited by Apocalypse Now: 28 December 2008 - 10:36 PM

[D'rek]

Apocalypse Now, on Dec 28 2008, 05:34 PM, said:

I was under the assumption that the T'lan Imass had screwed over Aren during the initial conquest of Seven Cities by the Empire, and that the creation of the Bridgeburners was during the initial Malazan conquest of Seven Cities, and occurred when the conquered city's mage cadre retreated into Raraku, with Kalam taking the other mage's powers and so on.

Then later, didn't they take over a big fortress with just a small amount of guys? I think it was during the original conquest these things happened, I don't think you can say that resistance during a foreign power's seizing control over a whole continent is a rebellion, at most it's an insurgency, resistance to occupying forces. The insurgency in Iraq right now, that isn't a rebellion. A rebellion occurs after years of peace perhaps. Like say the US installed government in Iraq gets overthrown in twenty years after we've left, THATS a rebellion.

Seven cities was never a whole government or a whole country so really Aren and the creation of the BB are all within the Malazan conquest, not separate incidents.

I like the sound of Raraku Uprising or the Sha'ik Uprising but any of those are good names to be honest.

Read the like 10 threads I posted in full and you'll get a good idea of how the varying events fit into the timeline.

MBotF doesn't use the word 'insurgency'. Semantics aside, which they are, it's a rebellion...

[Apocalypse Now]

I still wouldn't classify Aren as it's own rebellion. I mean, it sounds to me like it took place not that long after the initial conquest of the 7C, and the whole forging of the bridgeburners thing all took place relatively close to it, within a year or two. To me, that still falls under that, because they were still getting things in order and that was basically 7C's last hurrah against the Malazan conquest. To me, it's all events in the same metaconflict.

If anything, you can call the first one the Aren Uprising.

I still like to think of the one in DHG as The Seven Cities Rebellion because the entire continent basically rose up in revolt, in every town and village it was happening, as well as all the cities mostly. The Aren thing seems like a gathering of people who fought but survived the war against the empire and gathered forces for one last hurrah.

[D'rek]

Apocalypse Now, on Dec 28 2008, 09:59 PM, said:

I still wouldn't classify Aren as it's own rebellion. I mean, it sounds to me like it took place not that long after the initial conquest of the 7C, and the whole forging of the bridgeburners thing all took place relatively close to it, within a year or two. To me, that still falls under that, because they were still getting things in order and that was basically 7C's last hurrah against the Malazan conquest. To me, it's all events in the same metaconflict.

If anything, you can call the first one the Aren Uprising.

I still like to think of the one in DHG as The Seven Cities Rebellion because the entire continent basically rose up in revolt, in every town and village it was happening, as well as all the cities mostly. The Aren thing seems like a gathering of people who fought but survived the war against the empire and gathered forces for one last hurrah.

You have a large number of misconceptions going on. Should've read the threads I suggested because I'm not going to bother listing them for you.

Also, this was not in any way the purpose of this thread, so maybe you should just go start your own thread about that and let this thread die from disinterest as it should.

This post has been edited by D'rek: 29 December 2008 - 03:31 AM

[Dolorous Menhir]

D'rek, on Dec 29 2008, 03:29 AM, said:

Also, this was not in any way the purpose of this thread, so maybe you should just go start your own thread about that and let this thread die from disinterest as it should.

Harsh.

It's what I was going to say, but still.

[Illuyankas]

Go with The Whirlwind Rebellion. Failing that, Sha'ik Rebellion or the Whirlwind, in that order.

[HoosierDaddy]

Concur. The Whirlwind seems to be the name they use themselves, right?

[D'rek]

Yeah, they do seem to use the Whirlwind a lot, but here's the thing. First of all, the Whirlwind also refers to the sandstorm around Raraku itself, and to the power of Dryjhna at some points, and also to the alignment of the fighters, so there's the possibility of it starting to get really ambiguously used. Secondly, someone in DG remarks, upon hearing about Sha'ik's death, that the Whirlwind will simply disperse until it comes back again in a thousand years or so, indicating that it might be cyclical and there may be more Whirlwind-related activities out there. I'll obviously have to dig up the quote on that...

Edit: Here we go

DG, on p. 453 UK mmpb, said:

Fiddler: 'If Sha'ik's dead, she's dead. Hood take any obscure prophecies! The Apocalypse will fizzle out, the Whirlwind sink back into the ground to sleep another thousand years or however long it is until the next Year of Dryjhna comes around...'

This post has been edited by D'rek: 29 December 2008 - 08:55 PM

[Illuyankas]

That could have been due to the influence of Onrack's ex Dryjhna's influence, being the Whirlwind Goddess and all. Influence now permanently ended. I don't think the Whirlwind is coming back, personally. Also there's the newest Sha'ik Reborn making a cult that will be referenced later, and might spark a new uprising, so I wouldn't put Sha'ik just yet.

[D'rek]

Illuyankas, on Dec 29 2008, 03:43 PM, said:

That could have been due to the influence of Onrack's ex Dryjhna's influence, being the Whirlwind Goddess and all. Influence now permanently ended. I don't think the Whirlwind is coming back, personally. Also there's the newest Sha'ik Reborn making a cult that will be referenced later, and might spark a new uprising, so I wouldn't put Sha'ik just yet.

But what of there was a Whirlwind a thousand years before this one?!

And good point, Sha'ik has more to come. Any idea if they're re-using the name Apocalypse with the new cult?

[Illuyankas]

We ain't seen it or any reference to it in the books yet, so why worry?

And the new Sha'ik seems to be more 'embrace' than 'blow it all to hell', but they might reuse it for the continuity.

[Epiph]

In the event of another Sha'ik uprising, couldn't you name them the 1st and 2nd Sha'ik uprisings? I mean, WWI was called the Great War until WWII...

[Aptorian]

Wouldn't that be 1st Apocalypse, 2nd Apocalypse, , 3rd... etc.? Or can you not call it the apocalypse now that Dryjna is gone?

[Epiph]

Or you could call it "The Seven Cities Rebellion of <whatever year>"

[Illuyankas]

Wait, using the timeline? OH SHI-

[Epiph]

Er. Yeah, nevermind.

[D'rek]

Aptorian, on Dec 30 2008, 02:31 PM, said:

Wouldn't that be 1st Apocalypse, 2nd Apocalypse, , 3rd... etc.? Or can you not call it the apocalypse now that Dryjna is gone?

Maaaybe, but I think Mathok said at the end of HoC that the Book of Dryjhna's talk of the Apocalypse was really a recounting events that occured long ago in the past!

And your current avatar freaks me out...

[beru]

the imass attacked Aren wile Dancer still was Dacer and Surly still was surly... in DHG or tHB eather cottilon or apsalar says so... (qute beeing somthing like: irealy wanted to kill her (surly))

[D'rek]

beru, on Jan 24 2009, 10:05 PM, said:

the imass attacked Aren wile Dancer still was Dacer and Surly still was surly... in DHG or tHB eather cottilon or apsalar says so... (qute beeing somthing like: irealy wanted to kill her (surly))

Not sure of the relevance but...
Surly was still Surly even after she renamed herself Laseen. Members of the Old Guard, especially, continued to call her Surly. Apsalar says it's from Dancer's memories, but she also has some of Cot's memories too, so she could very well remember being 'sent' as Cotillion (by ST I guess?) to confront Surly about her use of the T'lan Imass or something along those lines...